California fire victim

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by Omega, Oct 30, 2003.

  1. Omega

    Paolo Pizzi Guest


    My hat's off to you Tom, you're a fine intellect.
    No wonder Allan Mayer hates your guts...;-)
    Paolo Pizzi, Nov 3, 2003
    1. Advertisements

  2. Omega

    Azzz1588 Guest

    Hey tom, what happened to communists in your posts ????

    "Only a Gentleman can insult me, and a true Gentleman never will..."
    Azzz1588, Nov 3, 2003
    1. Advertisements

  3. Omega

    FOR7b Guest

    I trust that as they are exposed to more
    Who says a piece of art has to have a message?

    FOR7b, Nov 3, 2003
  4. Not from liberals, no, as you so clearly indicate by not telling us HOW
    MUCH of your own time/money go for charities. If you did give/do much,
    you could easily rebut my point by simply saying so. But since I nailed you
    on the head, you must resort to obfuscation. Come now, HOW MUCH? If
    you like, I will be happy to post the figures from my last 5 years (or 10
    years, if you like) charitable contributions from my tax returns, right along
    side yours. Put your money where your mouth is. If you are correct, SHOW
    So, is it wrong to blame people for what they themselves do? In the liberal
    view, obviously yes.
    Put your money where your mouth is: HOW MUCH?
    You have the liberal mindset perfectly described there: It's always somebody
    else's fault. With criminals, it's the victim's and society's fault. With people
    too lazy to work, it's society's fault. And so on, ad infinitum.

    The conservative viewpoint, on the other hand, as can be clearly seen in
    my comments, is that it is the fault of those who do wrongful and/or stupid
    things who are at fault. For example, it is the Red Cross' fault for squandering
    98% of the contributions they receive. When someone builds a home right on
    the ocean front, where hurricanes will inevitably wipe them off the face
    of the earth, it is their choice, their fault. With freedom goes responsibility.
    They have the freedom to do it, and the responsibility to pay for it.
    Judson McClendon, Nov 3, 2003
  5. Well, I have an office at home. But I enjoy the highways our taxes pay
    for, as it should be. I also enjoy the benefits of law enforcement and the
    military protection of our country, also as it should be. You see, I, and
    all other taxpayers, benefit from those tax expenditures, whether we
    want to pay the taxes or not. But neither I nor the rest of society, benefits
    from taxes being spent to rebuild a house some idiot built in the flood
    basin of a river, or taxes spent to support someone capable, but too lazy
    to work.
    Actually, I said "threat of imprisionment". Do you really believe people
    would pay their taxes without that threat? :) I do not object to the taxes,
    or to the threat. I only object to using those taxes we are forced to pay,
    for purposes that do not benefit society, but only benefit individuals who
    are the victim only of their own laziness and/or stupidity.
    Not at all. In fact, I have never thought, said or intentionally implied
    anything to the contrary in my entire life. So, what is your point? :)
    Judson McClendon, Nov 3, 2003
  6. Oh, contraire! It is at the very heart of this discussion! And you make
    it our business when you call me and others names like 'selfish' and
    'heartless'. In other words, from what moral ground, sir, do you stand
    on which to make such accusations? My guess is that you do not give
    anywhere near 1% of your net income to charities, and have probably
    not contributed a single hour to charitible work in the last year. Yet
    you are so self-rightous in your proclimations. Come now, sir, HOW
    Of course, though it is not a 'game'.
    I completely agree.
    Not so. You cannot give one example of my saying any such thing.
    What I do not like is a foolish, selfish, unbridled, 'majority trample
    the minority' mentality, such as the legal persecution of minorities,
    or taking taxes which people are (of necessity) forced to pay, and
    spending it on things not in the interests of society as a whole.
    EVERYBODY should be able to do what they want with money
    they worked to earn, rich or poor being completely irrelevant.
    People should NEVER be forced to pay for anything which is not
    in beneficial to them, or society as a whole.
    No, it was called "before FDR".
    Really? It only made the US the richest, most powerful nation in the
    history of the world, with the highest standard of living ever seen.
    Do you realize that, since the various government 'help the poor'
    programs have been instituted, poverty, illiteracy, crime and the
    destruction of the family unit has literally skyrocketed? So, when
    liberals start a program and it fails miserably, the solution is more
    of it? Apparently so, in the liberal mind. Liberalism, here in the US
    is about form, not substance. No? Fine, HOW MUCH?
    Judson McClendon, Nov 3, 2003
  7. Omega

    George Kerby Guest

    Yes, Tom I have spent numerous hours in creation of this piece. It is
    dedicated to you. I hope that it is up to your expectations because I know
    that you are so demanding. I hope you appreciate my work and will be
    extremely honest in your detailed criticism.
    My pleasure...
    George Kerby, Nov 3, 2003
  8. Omega

    George Kerby Guest

    George Kerby, Nov 3, 2003
  9. Omega

    Tom Potter Guest

    Hey Azzz1588,
    I don't write much about Communists,
    as they are just another form of government,
    and all forms of government have their good
    and bad points.

    As some people, who are ignorant of history
    confuse Communists with the Bolsheviks
    who instigated the class wars of the 1900's,
    and who are instigating the religious wars of the 2000's
    I have made posts pointing out their error.

    As noted, forms of government like democracy, socialism,
    communism, monarchy, etc have their good and bad points,
    everything about the Bolsheviks is bad, because they have a
    long history of instigating conflict and war for power and riches,
    and as can be seen, their instigation of conflict and war
    has caused most of mankinds pain and suffering.

    In other words, most people have been conditioned
    to equate the evil deeds of the Bolsheviks with Communists,
    by the well oiled propoganda machine of the Bolsheviks,
    which is alive and well.

    If you want to correlate the instigation of conflict
    and war with any group, or form of government,
    just open you eyes and mind, read a little history,
    analyse current events, and think about who is
    central to most conflict and war, and who ends up
    profiting from it.
    Tom Potter, Nov 3, 2003
  10. Omega

    Paolo Pizzi Guest

    As usual, you completely miss the point. I told you that
    I contribute quite a lot to charities and that should be
    enough for you. Obviously I'm not quoting any figures
    because to prove you that it's a good chunk of what I
    make, I'd have to disclose my financial situation to a
    perfect stranger, correction, to potentially MILLIONS
    of perfect strangers on the internet, including ultra
    right-wing nutcases with a vengeance like Allan Mayer,
    who already have publicly expressed their wish to see
    me dead or cause harm to me and my family. So please,
    refrain from insisting with your "how much?" tirade.

    Now that hopefully you have understood the above, let
    me explain ONCE MORE why the "...but I give a lot
    to charities" stance is completely IRRELEVANT. You
    give money to whoever YOU want and I'm pretty sure
    you are VERY selective. Your disgust with taxpayer
    money given to fire victims in So.Cal is a pretty good
    indication that you would NEVER give those people any
    money of yours and it perfectly proves my point that in a
    democracy people with money should not be able to
    ONLY donate money to those that comply with their
    agenda. That's why they have invented goverment,
    democracy and taxes. Now we know that you HATE
    democracy, but it you live in one, either you respect the
    law or you leave and find a country more suitable to
    your ideals (or lack thereof...)
    See above.
    Of course you're incapable of any abstraction.
    I think I would waste my time trying to explain you
    what a simile or a metaphor is...
    Really? It seems like what follows completely contradicts
    what you've just said:
    So, you're NOT accepting the rule of the majority, or
    probably you are only when it pleases you. How
    ???? Meaning what? You hate that poor minorities are
    entitled to legal representation and that the goverment
    even pays for that? You can breath a sigh of relief: rest
    assured it's an infinitesimal amount of money: pro-bono
    work for minorities is mostly accomplished through
    voluntary contributions from decent, anti-racism people
    like me.
    ???? Everyone is "forced" to pay taxes. Otherwise they
    wouldn't be taxes but "voluntary contributions."
    You see, once again THAT's the problem, you think YOU
    get to decide what is in the "interest of society" and what
    is not. But it's not like that, not in a democracy where you
    only count ONE VOTE.
    Never said otherwise. I was talking about TAX MONEY.
    You don't get to decide how your tax money is spent,
    or, to be more precise, you get to decide ONLY as far
    as your SINGLE VOTE counts. That's what a democracy
    is. I know you hate it, you made it very clear.
    Once more, you should understand you don't get to
    decide that, not beyond your SINGLE VOTE. That's
    how a democracy works.
    And that's the direction you'd want our country to
    go? Worker exploitation, blatant racism, all sorts of
    discrimination, no social shock absorbers (social
    security, unions etc.), no rights for women (and I'm not
    even touching gays...), incredible disparity, political and
    religious repression, anti-semitism, ludicrous justice (the
    names Sacco and Vanzetti or Bruno Hauptmann should
    give you a hint...), rampant crime and unemployment,
    widespread illiteracy etc.

    Is that what you really want for your country?
    Really? Are you absolutely sure?
    People were much better off before FDR than TODAY?
    No doubt the Rockefellers might think so...
    You are "right" (as in "ultra-right"), the solution for
    all problems in our country is to go back to the
    1920's...Who cares if minorities were treated like
    animals, if workers were exploited, if women had
    no rights, if non-WASPS were sent to the electric
    chair just because they were "guilty" of being immigrants,
    if blacks were considered 2/3 of human beings,
    if everybody hated Jews, if Asians were never allowed
    to be naturalized into US citizens, if poor people were
    literally dying of starvation in droves and nobody
    really gave a crap.

    Thank you for showing us your agenda so clearly.
    Your "substance" looks a lot like Adolf Hitler's...
    Back to the 1920's, sheeeeeeeeeesh....
    Paolo Pizzi, Nov 4, 2003
  11. Omega

    Ray Fischer Guest

    Typical conservative bigot: Always blame everything on "liberals".
    So it's not wrong to blame you for being a greedy, selfish hypocrite
    who hates people who try to help others?
    Again, always blame liberals. You haven't the first clue what my
    political bent might be, but your knee-jerk reaction is to call people
    "liberals" whenever they expose the problems with your ideology.

    "I got mine and to hell with you."
    And anything YOU don't like is "wrongful and/or stupid".
    Ray Fischer, Nov 4, 2003
  12. Omega

    Azzz1588 Guest

    What a liar you are !!!

    Do a google search on you, and postings from before are laced with
    refferences to communism.

    Tell us some more about your whacked out physicis ideas too...

    Better yet DONT !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


    "Only a Gentleman can insult me, and a true Gentleman never will..."
    Azzz1588, Nov 4, 2003
  13. Yipes!! At least I turned up in the comfort of a fire engine!! :(
    No one was in the house when it went up, no direct injuries.

    Paul Repacholi 1 Crescent Rd.,
    +61 (08) 9257-1001 Kalamunda.
    West Australia 6076
    comp.os.vms,- The Older, Grumpier Slashdot
    Raw, Cooked or Well-done, it's all half baked.
    EPIC, The Architecture of the future, always has been, always will be.
    Paul Repacholi, Nov 4, 2003
  14. Omega

    Tom Potter Guest

    As I wrote,
    "I don't write much about Communists",
    I just mention the word when someone displays
    thier ignorance and confuses Communists with Bolsheviks.

    The difference between the two is very clear.

    Communism is just a form of government,
    and like all forms of government,
    it has its' good and bad points.

    On the other hand,
    the Bolsheviks have a lomg history of
    instigating conflict and war for power and wealth.

    They instigated the class wars of the 1900's,
    and as their class wars have been dicredited,
    and the native Russians have regained control of
    their government, the Bolsheviks have migrated to
    Israel and New York, from where they are instigating
    the religious wars of the 2000's, to get back in the
    chips, as the loot from their class wars is almost gone.

    As can be seen, the basic motivation of Communists
    is to make life better for all people, whereas the
    motivation of the Bolsheviks is to make life better
    for all a small set of people.

    It is not surprising that most people have been
    brainwashed to equate the class wars to the Communists,
    and to equate th religious wars to the Muslims,
    because the Bolsheviks have a long history of instigating
    conflict and war, and blaming it on the loser.
    The Bolsheviks have a well oiled propoganda machine
    and make a major effort to:
    1. Instigate conflict between two sets of people.
    2. Avoid taking an active part in the conflict.
    3. Make a profit from the conflict.
    4. Blame the conflict on the losing party.

    Bolsheviks exploit ANY difference between folks
    in order to get them to fight. Rich/poor, Black/White,
    Muslim/non-Muslim, North/South, Asian/Occidental, etc.
    It makes no differences to the people
    who instigate conflict and war,
    what the differences are.

    How do you recognize a war for profit instigator?
    Just look at any major conflict,
    and see who is at the root of the conflict,
    and who is profiting form it, and you'll know.

    You can bet that the Blacks, Rednecks and Latinos
    who are sacrificing their lives, limbs, liberties,
    and fortunes to fight folks they would otherwise get
    along with just fine, are not the instigators.

    They are just the brainwashed dupes.
    Tom Potter, Nov 5, 2003
  15. Omega

    Azzz1588 Guest

    Lying again I see.....

    I could care less about your family, being around you,
    is punishment enough for them.....................

    You are a tosser...........................

    "Only a Gentleman can insult me, and a true Gentleman never will..."
    Azzz1588, Nov 5, 2003
  16. Omega

    John Morgan Guest

    But then you get OUT of your truck and run inside the fire to put it out.
    Didn't you ever listen when your parents told you that when the house is on
    fire you GET OUT!
    Stay safe,

    John Morgan, Nov 5, 2003
  17. Omega

    Witheld Guest

    Unfortunately/fortunately most that die in fires, die in sleep, the smoke gets
    you first.....but maybe that is just as well, less painful.

    Then again dead is dead.
    Witheld, Nov 5, 2003
  18. No, had to get the trees out. If the fire had jumped the road, we
    would never have stopped it. It was 48.7C that day.

    At least I don't get the shakes talking about it now.

    Paul Repacholi 1 Crescent Rd.,
    +61 (08) 9257-1001 Kalamunda.
    West Australia 6076
    comp.os.vms,- The Older, Grumpier Slashdot
    Raw, Cooked or Well-done, it's all half baked.
    EPIC, The Architecture of the future, always has been, always will be.
    Paul Repacholi, Nov 5, 2003
  19. No, I just blame liberals for the stupid things liberals do. :)
    If I were greedy, selfish, a hypocrite or hate people, you would be right.
    Anyone who know me well would laugh outright at your assessment. :)
    If your statements here do not peg you as a liberal, then you dissemble well. :)
    There are more than one kind of conservative, my friend. Yes, there are
    what I call Fat Cat conservatives who feel just as you describe. I dispise
    that philosophy as much as you do, I'm sure. There are also what I call
    Moral conservatives, who come to a social and financial conservative
    viewpoint from moral conviction. Your description is the antithesis of
    how moral conservatives believe. Perhaps you've never bothered to notice
    the difference?
    You have it backwards. If it's wrongful and/or stupid, then I don't like it. :)
    Judson McClendon, Nov 6, 2003
  20. My, my. A simple declaration of the percentage of your net income
    that your charitible income represents would be quite sufficient. :)
    Non sequiter. I believe in marriage, but I do not want the government
    selecting my spouse. Duh!
    Actually, this country has represented my ideals pretty well, at least
    until you rabid liberals started trying to force your twisted logic on
    the rest of us.
    I see that you are refuse to disclose it because it would prove my point.
    If that were not so, you could easily prove me wrong.
    Actually, I am very, very good at dealing with abstraction. My entire
    career (35+ years) has been spent in designing and programming
    computer software, just about as abstract an activity as you can get.
    Only when you have a pinheaded view of things and don't listen.
    I am saying that ANY authority of people over others should have
    reasonable limits. As I pointed out, legally based racial discrimination
    was also rule by majority. So you approve of that, just because it's
    'democratic'? Democracy is not something you that should be blindly
    worshiped. it is something you use with wisdom. Assuming any is
    available, of course. :)
    Meaning that absolute application of rule by majority with no limits
    can result in some very bad things.
    Of course not! That is an entirely proper constitutional right in this
    Are you actually reading what I write, or are you just ranting randomly?
    Why do you think I wrote "(of necessity)"?!? That means, to make it
    blindingly obvious, "it is necessary that they are forced". Duh!
    Actually, common sense (a commodity obviously in short supply in
    certain quarters) is quite sufficient in most cases.
    Now that is the most amazingly perceptive statement I have seen in
    quite a while. Where do you think TAX MONEY comes from? It
    WAS their money before the government took it from them. Sheesh!
    I only made it clear that I hate it when tax money is spent on things
    that benefit only a very few people, and not society in general.
    Does that mean the government has to be stupid about it? Are you
    advocating idiocy as a principle?
    What do any of those things have to do with the government paying
    someone for doing something stupid?
    Yes, and you would be too if you simply looked at the statistics. Well,
    considering your posts, maybe you wouldn't, after all. :)
    Once again, those things have absolutely nothing to do with the
    government paying somebody for being stupid.
    My pleasure. :)

    Here it comes:
    When it gets down to the old "you're like Hitler" thing, it's time to
    go. Well, it's been fun. "-)
    Judson McClendon, Nov 6, 2003
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.